'Will Hit All Of Iran's Nuclear Facilities': Netanyahu's 'With Or Without Trump' Warning
Last Updated:
Amid intensifying Iran-Israel conflict, Netanyahu said Israel can eliminate all of Iran's nuclear facilities without US approval, asserting Israel won't seek a 'green light'.
As the Iran-Israel conflict rages on, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said his country is capable of removing all of Iran's nuclear facilities, whether or not US President Donald Trump decides to join in.
Netanyahu also said Israel will not wait for a green signal from the United States before it hits Iranian sites, including the underground nuclear site in Fordo.
'We will achieve all our objectives and hit all of their nuclear facilities. We have the capability to do that," Netanyahu said in a Hebrew-language interview with the Kan public broadcaster.
'The matter of changing the regime or the fall of this regime is, first and foremost, a matter for the Iranian people. There is no substitute for this," the Israeli Prime Minister said.
Whether Donald Trump 'wants to join or not, that's entirely his decision," he said.
'He'll do what is good for the United States, and I'll do what is good for the State of Israel," Netanyahu said, adding that Israel is not asking for permission, or a 'green light" from any foreign power.
Fordo is buried under a mountain and widely considered to be out of reach of all but America's 'bunker-buster" bombs.
First Published:
June 20, 2025, 09:15 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
30 minutes ago
- Business Standard
What is Samson Option, Israel's nuclear threat that's no longer a theory?
Tensions between Israel and Iran have escalated sharply after 'Operation Rising Lion' — Israel's largest strike on Iranian nuclear sites since the 1981 Osirak raid. Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks, straining Israeli defence systems and prompting fears of wider conflict. With Hezbollah mobilising in the north, Houthi threats rising in the Red Sea, and the possibility of a multi-front war looming, Israeli security doctrine is under renewed global scrutiny. At the centre of that attention is the Samson Option, Israel's undeclared but long-assumed nuclear last-resort policy. Once regarded as a Cold War-era relic, the Samson Option has re-emerged as a global worry with serious implications for global security, defence markets, and diplomatic stability. What is the Samson Option? The Samson Option is widely understood as Israel's nuclear last-resort strategy: threat of massive retaliation if the country's survival is at stake. The name is derived from a reference of the biblical figure Samson, who brought down a Philistine temple upon himself and his enemies, an allegory for apocalyptic deterrence. Though Israel has never confirmed possessing nuclear weapons, its policy of 'Amimut' (Israel's policy of neither confirming nor denying the possession of nuclear weapons), or deliberate ambiguity, has kept adversaries guessing. However, foreign assessments suggest Israel has 80 to 400 nuclear warheads, with delivery systems spanning land-based missiles, submarines, and aircraft. The doctrine entered public discourse in the 1990s via US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who, in his book The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy, explored Israel's nuclear journey and its relation with the United States. Since then, Israel hardened its 'strategic ambiguity' concept over the possession of a nuclear arsenal. How did Israel build its nuclear arsenal? Israel's nuclear journey began in the 1950s, with the then Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion envisioning a survival insurance policy for the newly-formed Jewish nation. With covert help from France and Norway, Israel established the Dimona nuclear facility, presented publicly as a research centre. By the time of the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel is believed to have constructed its first nuclear weapon. Who is Samson, and why is Israel's nuclear policy named after him? The doctrine's name draws from the Book of Judges, where Samson, betrayed, blinded, and imprisoned, sacrifices himself to destroy his enemies. This story, ingrained in Israeli strategic thinking, underlines the nation's message: if its destruction is imminent, it will not go quietly. Yet unlike the doomed biblical hero, modern Israel is a technologically advanced military power. The Samson Option, therefore, is not desperation, but a calculated deterrent, designed to force potential adversaries to think twice. What nuclear weapons does Israel have? Although never confirmed, Israel is among the nine nuclear-armed nations alongside the United States, Russia, China, the UK, France, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Estimates suggest Israel possesses about 90 warheads, with enough plutonium to build up to 200 more, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative. Its arsenal is believed to include: > Aircraft: Modified F-15, F-16, and F-35 jets capable of carrying nuclear payloads. > Submarines: Six Dolphin-class submarines, reportedly capable of launching nuclear cruise missiles. > Ballistic missiles: The land-based Jericho missile family, with a range of up to 4,000 km. Around 24 of these missiles are believed to be nuclear-capable. What was the Vela incident? Israel is the only nuclear power which has not openly conducted a nuclear test. The closest indication came in September 1979, when US satellites detected a double flash over the South Atlantic, an event known as the 'Vela Incident'. At the time, US President Jimmy Carter reportedly believed Israel had conducted a nuclear test in collaboration with apartheid-era South Africa. 'We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test,' Carter later wrote in his diaries, which were made public in 2010. Despite speculation, Israel has never confirmed its involvement in the incident. How was Israel's nuclear arsenal revealed to the world? In October 1986, former nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu exposed Israel's nuclear programme in an explosive interview with the Sunday Times. Having worked at the Dimona plant for nearly a decade, Vanunu revealed that Israel was capable of producing 1.2 kg of plutonium per week, enough for 12 warheads annually. He also disclosed how Israeli officials had deceived US inspectors during visits in the 1960s with false walls and concealed elevators, hiding entire underground levels of the facility. Vanunu was later abducted by Mossad in Rome, tried in Israel, and sentenced to 18 years in prison, spending over half that time in solitary confinement. Even after his release in 2004, he remains under strict surveillance, barred from foreign travel and media engagement. With West Asia at the edge of a potential multi-front war, Israel's Samson Option has moved from the realm of whispered deterrence to an option in real-world decision-making. Its existence, unconfirmed but globally acknowledged, adds a nuclear dimension to an already combustible region.
News18
38 minutes ago
- News18
'Disgraceful': UK PM Slams RAF Jets Vandalisation By Pro-Palestinian Activists
Last Updated: A statement by Palestine Action said that the activists exited the Oxfordshire base without being apprehended. Meanwhile, UK Defence Ministry condemned the incident. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the 'vandalisation" of two planes by the pro-Palestinian activists on Friday. This comes as the UK police have begun searching for suspects after pro-Palestinian activists claimed to have broken into a Royal Air Force Base and damaged two planes with red paint. The group Palestine Action said two members entered RAF Brize Norton on Wednesday and used electric scooters to approach the Voyager jets, which are used for air-to-air refuelling. Referring to the 'act of vandalism" as 'disgraceful", PM Keir Starmer wrote on X, 'The act of vandalism committed at RAF Brize Norton is disgraceful. Our Armed Forces represent the very best of Britain and put their lives on the line for us every day. It is our responsibility to support those who defend us." The act of vandalism committed at RAF Brize Norton is Armed Forces represent the very best of Britain and put their lives on the line for us every day. It is our responsibility to support those who defend us. — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 20, 2025 A video shared online by Palestine Action on Friday captured two individuals inside an airbase in Oxfordshire at night. One of them was seen riding a scooter toward an Airbus Voyager aircraft and spraying paint into one of its jet engines. Pro-Palestinian activists from the group Palestine Action broke into RAF Brize Norton, the largest Royal Air Force base in the UK, located in they vandalized two Airbus Voyager refueling aircraft. Using electric scooters, the activists approached the planes… — T_CAS videos (@tecas2000) June 20, 2025 According to Palestine Action, the activists exited the Oxfordshire base without being apprehended. In a statement, the group said, 'despite publicly condemning the Israeli government, Britain continues to send military cargo, fly spy planes over Gaza and refuel US/Israeli fighter jets." It went on to describe the UK as 'an active participant in the Gaza genocide and war crimes across the Middle East." Meanwhile, the UK Ministry of Defence confirmed the incident and stated, 'We strongly condemn this vandalism of Royal Air Force assets." Aircraft from RAF Brize Norton, located around 70 miles (112 kilometres) northwest of London, frequently operate flights to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, which serves as Britain's primary base for military operations in the Middle East. Following the escalation of the Israel-Iran conflict a week ago, the UK has deployed additional Typhoon fighter jets and Voyager refuelling aircraft to Cyprus. Prime Minister Keir Starmer described this move as 'contingency support." Meanwhile, Iran has warned it will target military bases belonging to the US, France, and the UK in the region if they assist Israel in defending against Iranian attacks. First Published: June 20, 2025, 16:44 IST
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Banks are financing their own multitrillion-dollar nightmare
If you come home early from vacation and find robbers ransacking your house, you could call the police and try to stop the crime. But the true alpha move would be to help the robbers load your valuables onto the truck and then tell them which of your neighbors are also on vacation in exchange for a cut of the profits. Banks are choosing the alpha option, basically abetting theft from themselves by backing new projects to extract and burn fossil fuels, thus stoking the planetary heating that stunts economic growth and their own insurance and mortgage businesses. Of course, these financial companies do get a cut of the short-term profits from this environmental sabotage. And by abandoning the pretense of siding with the climate, they avoid political blowback from a US government that has declared war on it. But the long-term result will be a global economy trillions of dollars poorer and far less stable, impoverishing just about everyone, including the banks. The world's 65 biggest banks delivered $869.4 billion in financing to fossil-fuel companies last year, up $162.5 billion from 2023, according to a new report by the Rainforest Action Network, the Sierra Club, and several other nonprofit groups. Banks have funneled $7.9 trillion in loans and underwriting to these polluting industries since the Paris climate accords took effect in 2016, by the report's measure. This doesn't include any investments by banks' asset-management units, which amount to hundreds of billions of dollars more. Bloomberg Last year's financing surge reversed two years of declines and coincided with a turn of political sentiment against 'woke' environmental, social and governance considerations in business. Climate actions drew some of the harshest attacks, with President Donald Trump and other conservatives blaming them for rising energy prices. Such claims helped Trump win a second term. On his first day in office, he declared that his predecessor's foolish concern for the climate had created a 'national energy emergency' that hurt Americans' finances. His prescription has been to attack any public or private activity meant to slow the burning of fossil fuels. Live Events Banks saw the direction that the wind was blowing and quickly changed tack. The biggest immediately quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, a group that vows to help eliminate greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050. They claim to still have their own goals for curbing emissions, but they've apparently given up trying to make their actions match their words. To meet the Paris Agreement 's rapidly fading stretch goal of holding global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial averages, energy financing should favor green projects over fossil fuels by a 4-to-1 ratio, according to BloombergNEF. In 2023, the latest data available, the ratio was just 0.89-to-1. Boosting fossil-fuel financing last year probably didn't move that ratio in the right direction. Bloomberg Meanwhile, the economic damage caused by a heating planet keeps mounting. Global climate-related costs — including insured and uninsured losses, government relief spending and higher insurance premiums — have topped $18.5 trillion since January 2000, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated recently. The US alone accounted for $7.7 trillion of the damage, or 36% of its growth in gross domestic product over that stretch. In just the 12 months through April, US climate-related costs totaled nearly $1 trillion, BI said, roughly matching bank financing for fossil fuels during that time. You might argue economic activity is economic activity, that building a house is basically the same as rebuilding a house, that government disaster relief is no different from any other flavor of government spending. But simply responding to disasters again and again is no way to grow an economy. Money spent to rebuild houses, bridges and roads is money not spent on college educations, better infrastructure or other productivity-boosting measures. It steals growth from the future. A National Bureau of Economic Research paper last fall estimated that a planet hotter by 3C — its current trajectory — would have a GDP that was smaller by more than a third. A study last week from the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy found that a complete rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act's climate measures, something Trump and congressional Republicans have been working hard to do, would shave $1.1 trillion from US GDP alone over the next decade. It would also kill 22,800 Americans, take $160 billion from American incomes and cause the average home's energy bill to be $206 higher. Talk about an emergency. But if you need a more immediate climate threat to finance profits to be convinced, you can already see one in the growing crisis in home insurance. Every new wildfire, flood, tornado and hurricane exposes just how underinsured and underprepared Americans are for such disasters, putting possibly $2 trillion in home valuations at risk. Given the political reality, it's understandable for banks to speak softly about protecting the planet and their own future profits. Helping fossil fuels build an even bigger stick with which to beat them makes much less sense.
